Lame excuses for not vaccinating

Imagine you go to the quack, because of a slight dizzy feeling? 'I'm afraid medicine can't help you, but you've got it for the rest of your days. Be careful because this will mean you are more likely than average to have a car accident'. 'How much more likely?' you ask. I have no idea he replies. Would you stop driving your DC about?

Imagine your friend works for the govt stats office. She tells you that car manufacturers and govt have been conspiring to under-report car accidents. 'Cor' you say, 'how much are they fiddling the numbers'. 'That's just the problem no-one knows because it's all hush hush'. Would you stop driving your DC about?

I'm guessing most people would carry on driving. In which case, why do people use the exact same reasons for not vaccinating?

The anti-vaxer reasons that uncle Bert gets hay fever, hay fever is hereditary and something to do with immune system, vaccine damage is also something to do with the immune system, DC are related to uncle Bert, and are thus more likely than average to suffer vaccine damage. They thus don't vaccinate them.

The anti-vaxer believes that the evil quartet of doctors, scientists, govt and pharma conspire to under-report vaccine damage. All part of their thirst to play god, and make lots of money by making people ill, not forgetting generous measures of incompetence and stupidity. They reason that vaccine damage is under-reported so they don't vaccinate their children.

I have never seen any attempt to quantify whether either 'the more susceptible than average' or the conspiracy theory could plausibly be sufficient to justify not vaccinating. It's incredible lame. Many anti-vaxer start from a position of prejudice against vaccination. They then compile a long list of selective quotes, mis-quotes, anecdotes, quasi-scientific speculations, and conspiracy theories. They say this list is evidence, and that their prejudice has become a rational analysis. It isn?t. It?s an uncritical list of unquantified elements which are superficially consistent with their position.

My children are all vaxed so don't assume because I don't like the judgy, mean OP that I am of opposing views. I just dont have my head so far up my bum that I feel the need to judge and bash people with different views to mine.

I'm always quite shocked that people would rather risk a child's life through not vaccinating (mmr etc) rather than risk a few allergies or whatever they perceive to be a risk (which isn't a risk anyway).

And I do think that people hear certain scientific/biological words ie. genetic, immune system, histamine, allergy and don't really understand them or the processes they are involved in and make up some cod biology to justify their silly beliefs.

Some people have solid considered reasons for not vaccinating. These people are non-vaxers not anti-vaxers. Such people can be too quick to assume that criticism of anti-vaxer's is also aimed at them. PAGwatch, you are surely aware that some people don't vaccinate for some pretty weak reasons. You do yourself a dis-service by allowing them to align themselves with you.

I don't agree that my op lumps together all people who don't vaccinate. I think it's quite clearly aimed at people who make uncritical use of the my child is more at risk or the conspiracy arguments. I arguably should have said 'Some anti-vaxers', as opposed 'The anti-vaxer'.

Is it me or is there something rather distasteful about the backpedalling by these people once Pagwatch comes on? ie you're all so stupid and thick and haven't a clue and such a bunch of know-nothings about science ..and then along comes Pagwatch, who everybody knows and likes, and is most definitely one of the most popular populars, and then we get "oh of course we didn't mean you, Pag, you're different," smarm smarm back pedal back pedal.

Accuracyrequired<struggles valiantly but unsuccessfully to contain mirth at the least appropriate pseudo ever chosen>you've accused be of back pedaling. Please back this up with 2 quotes, such that the latter pulls back from the former. When I say quotes, I mean quotes with quotation marks, not inferences, not summaries and not 'just read the thread'.

I guess my sisters reaction that resulted in a lifetime of disability and the pitiful payout she recieved from the government run vaccine compensation scheme isn't a good enough reason to not want to take that chance with my Dc in some random internet nobody's opinion. Good thing my GP, their Pead, the Hv all agreed with me when I asked for advice, that with our family history (other sister had a severe seizure but thankfully wasn't left dependant on 24 care) all said that in my shoes they would be very wary too.

Ho hum, <shrugs> if you as in the random nobody doesn't agree with that and and my Dc should be banished to an island. Your entitled to think that just as I'm entitled to say fuck off, you're not the one wiping my sisters backside, you're not the one changing her nappy, you're not the one seeing her in pain, you're child was lucky, they didn't react.

My mum has had a lifetime of regret getting my sister vaccinated after my other sister had her severe (itu admission) seizure. I won't offer up my children for collaterol damage to protect yours, if that makes me selfish again <shrug> my concern first and foremost is my children, vaccinate your own children by all means, if you're so convinced of their efficacy and saftey then my children shouldn't need to be banished to an island should they.

No medical treatment outside of mental health should be made mandatory, ever. The mere suggestion is idiotic and ignorant.

"The anti-vaxer believes that the evil quartet of doctors, scientists, govt and pharma conspire to under-report vaccine damage. All part of their thirst to play god, and make lots of money by making people ill, not forgetting generous measures of incompetence and stupidity. They reason that vaccine damage is under-reported so they don't vaccinate their children. I have never seen any attempt to quantify whether either 'the more susceptible than average' or the conspiracy theory could plausibly be sufficient to justify not vaccinating. It's incredible lame. "

"I don't agree that my op lumps together all people who don't vaccinate. I think it's quite clearly aimed at people who make uncritical use of the my child is more at risk or the conspiracy arguments. I arguably should have said 'Some anti-vaxers', as opposed 'The anti-vaxer'."

bit sneery, that OP.my children had all their vaccinations, but the pre school booster did make my daughter puke violently, or so it seemed to us, and it was horrible. So my son didn't get his.Every family has the right to make their own difficult decisions without being mocked by smug superior types like the OP.

I can detail my dss background, I have done before but it gets a bit dull.

But tbh that is a side issue.I could stand to one side and say 'i chose to not to vaccinate and I do so for these read on. Because those who are in favour of vaccination often accept these reasons as genuine I can stand aloof'

But in my experience (fwiw) people take vaccination very seriously, including those who decide not to. I have never met someone who doesn't vaccinate because the moon is not aligned or their chakra is damaged.

Most people I know are taking it incredibly seriously. Some (like me) woukd give anything to just go to the clinic and get it done without any doubt or concern. Our history and our experiences sometime colour our view and change our perception. As I said before, you could not imagine a person more prompt at the vaccination clinic until my experience forced me to rethink.

But if people judge differently and make a different decision from you I think heaping vitriol upon them, just because you feel you can, sucks.

These threads get raw because of the 'stick them all on an island' type comments. I have read stuff about 'you might as well have a gun' and all sort of sanctimonious clap trap.

So I won't try and draw a line between my choice and the choice that others make because, whilst I may not agree with them always, I try to respect the fact that they are actively seeking to do their best for their child. I try to do that throughout the site over things like breast feeding, school choice, religion etc.This is another choice where beating up on each other just because we feel it's fine annoys me.

But to be honest I should stay off these threads. I am very aware that I don't handle them well and it is harder at times when DS2 is struggling or DD is poorly.

Why didn't you just quote the entire op, and then the whole of any secondary posting. That way I'd be completely in the dark.

Are you suggesting The first quote does in fact lump all non-vaccinators together. If so you need to go and look up the prefix 'anti'.

Or are you suggesting my own proposal of 'some' for 'the' is back pedaling. 'The anti-vaxer' means a typical anti-vaxer, 'some anti vaxers' means a proportion of anti-vaxers. The distinction is moot. If that's the most substansive cricism you can muster, I must have done a pretty potent demolition with my original panful of utter shite.